And Yet I Speak But Little

New York, January 27th, 1788

My Dear Friend,

Mr Ingraham has furnished me with another conveyance to Boston, and I cannot neglect the opportunity of sending you a memento of the respect I have for your personal worth and the interest I feel in your happiness. Becca, I could speak of a thousand things which I cannot write, and yet I speak but little. I wish to see you every day, and yet I know not whether you would add to my happiness. I sometimes think of retiring from society and devoting myself to reading and contemplation, for I labor incessantly and reap very little fruit from my toils. I suspect I am not formed for society; and I wait only to be convinced that people wish to get rid of my company, and I would instantly leave them for better companions: the reflections of my own mind. Mankind generally form a just estimate of a man's character, and I am willing to think they do so with mine. And if I find that they think less favorable of me than I do myself, I submit to their opinion and consent to a separation.

You will see my the tenor of this letter that I am in the dumps a little and will require the reason. Why, Becca, I have been asked the question so often that it really displeases me. To satisfy such enquiries, it would be necessary to relate the history of my life, which you have heard before, and to enumerate a thousand things which ought to be forgotten.

I suspect that I have elevated my views too high, that I have mistaken my own character and ought to contract my wishes to a smaller compass. I am endeavoring to bring my mind to this state - a melancholy tale indeed! Well, I wish everybody were as good as James Greenleaf and his sister Becca. I should then be a much happier man, but as it is I will not be unhappy. I am as patient as possible, waiting for the sun to disperse the clouds that hang over the mind of your Cordial Friend and Admirer.

Noah Webster

Infinite What?

Top-of-my-head list of unresolved questions in Infinite Jest ranked in order of what seems to matter most to me.

1) What does Joelle really look like? [possibly resolved and I'm just in denial?]

2) How did Marathe [and to a lesser extent Steeply] get down the mountain?

3) What happened to Hal?

4) Did Marathe just give up on finding Joelle or what?

5) Was the Pakistani M.D / Ferocious Francis scene just Gately's hallucination?

6) What about the Whataburger?! And who took Pemulis' DMZ?

7) Wait... what happened at the fundraiser gala match between ETA and Quebec/ALF- the climactic final scene that never happens!

8) What happened to Stice's forehead? How did his bed really get up there?

The Federalist Persuasion 1782-1786

I want to recap and rehash some thoughts about the Federalist persuasion. You know, that thing I'm working on.

1) The transition to liberalism (whether or not "from republicanism") is still the most important and open question in the history of the early republic. Which is really also a question of, what is the nature of liberalism?

2) Intuitively (some sort of intuition that developed slowly, so is that really intuition?) I am saying that the transition to liberalism represented a shift from overt, explicit forms of social control to one of invisible or disguised forms. So not necessarily a shift from less freedom to more.

3) This shift became necessary (in America) when the ideology of revolution (republicanism, radical-Whiggism, whatever) made explicit social control - i.e. by the king - illegitimate and untenable. So it's the post-revolutionary moment when the real action happens: what form will the new, post-explicit-control society take?

4) Federalists were people who respected (and benefited from) social order. That is the meaning of values like "virtue" and especially "responsibility." Which is not to say they didn't sincerely and passionately hold those values. Both Enlightenment and religious impulses support those values.

5) Federalists were revolutionaries. In general they recognised and took part in the rise of 'liberty', i.e. the rejection of explicit, overt authority. However they remained committed to social order, i.e. 'rule' in some sense.

6) The Federalist achievment was therefore to construct a (constitutional) system that appeared to remove authority by granting it to 'the people' (and, perhaps, by locating it primarily in more distant central government*), while instituting new forms of hidden social control through institutions like the 'rule of law' (especially contract law and control of money powers) and election of representatives.

7) This achievement was not primarily a conscious swindling of the people or a counterrevolution, but a sincere attempt to square the circle of rejecting authority while maintaining social order. Federalist leaders felt this as their responsibility as revolutionaries.

8) Many of the disagreements within Federalist ranks were over the level of explicit authority embodied in the forms of American government - i.e. the same disagreements as embodied in the ratification debates. One form of disagreement was over what kind of social order was desired: Federalists differed among themselves here too just as much as they did with Antifederalists.

9) Nonetheless Federalists can be identified and divided from Antifederalists by their feelings of responsibility. Whereas the essence of Antifederalism was to defend the successful rejection of authority in the revolution, the essence of Federalism was to reestablish social order and control on new, legitimate grounds.

10) Federalists' concern with education and the form of Federalist educational proposals, as well as their ideas about retirement and the role of civic leaders, offer evidence for a Federalist understanding of responsibility and a way to characterise the Federalist persuasion as a (diverse) whole.

Stories and Feelings

So I had an 'epiphany' the other day. I wrote it on Twitter. Here:

Walking along Observatory St in the sun, thought I always seem to be moving between feelings. Seems obvious. But felt like 'epiphany'.

Thinking about it more, I think maybe this is something relevant to my writing. To write a novel or a story there has to be movement. I guess even if it's about a lack of movement, a going nowhere, that can presumably only be effective against a background, an expectation of movement. My 'stories' (or whatever) are very short, they seem mainly to express one feeling. Even if they have an implied plot, where other feelings and actions are remembered or foreshadowed (which they often do), that's not really the same as writing the movement of feelings in 'real time.' Somehow doing that seems like the step I need to make, in order to write longer things.

Earnest Nerds and Ironic Humour

Robin Hanson contributes to our ongoing investigation of irony:

So why are nerds, who at least have some strong skills, especially funny?

As I’ve hinted at before, and will elaborate more on later, I think the essence of humor is our sheer joy at playing homo hypocritus well. We just love to see the juxtaposition of two communication levels, an overt and a covert one, especially when this helps “us” take advantage of “them.”

Homo hypocritus pretends to mainly value overtly useful skills, while really greatly valuing covert conniving skills. Nerds tend to be much better at the former than the later, and are often unaware that the later skills exist. So the fact that nerds think well of themselves for their overt skills, but are largely unaware of how poor they are at covert conniving, is just hilarious.

Punchline

As I sd to my
friend, because I am
always talking,--John, I

sd, which was not his
name, the darkness sur-
rounds us, what

can we do against
it, or else, shall we &
why not, buy a goddamn big car,

drive, he sd, for
christ's sake, look
out where yr going.

- Robert Creeley, "I Know a Man"

Only to inflame himself more

Monday, October 24, 1757

This day near Sunset Landon Carter came home.
I, with great mildness, asked him if he did not think that, as he was to go up to Bull Hall tomorrow, he ought to have staid at home to have taken my directions with regard to my affairs. And if he did not think this sauntering about from house to house, only to inflame himself more by visiting a woman that he knew I would never consent to his marrying, would not ruin him, - and was contrary to his duty?
He answered very calmly, No.
Then, Sir, be assured that - although you will shortly be of age - if you do not henceforward leave her, you must leave me.
His answer, Then, Sir, I will leave you.
On which I bid him be gone out of my house.
He took up his hat, and sayd so he would, as soon as he could get his horse; and went off immediately without showing the least concern, no not even to turn round.
This I write down the moment it passed that I might not through want of memory omit so singular an act of great fillial disobedience in a child that I have thought once my greatest happyness - but as a just father kept it concealed.

- the diary of Landon Carter,
quoted in Rhy Isaac, Landon Carter's Uneasy Kingdom